Because debating definitions suck....

...we are going to define terms for you!

We don't want the focus of the limited committee time you have to be spent debating terms such as malnutrition and child pornography. This time should be used for debating the topic itself, and not small details such as this.

The following are the definitions we would like you to use:

Malnutrition: Malnutrition is a broad term commonly used as an alternative to undernutrition but technically it also refers to overnutrition. People are malnourished if their diet does not provide adequate calories and protein for growth and maintenance or they are unable to fully utilize the food they eat due to illness (undernutrition). They are also malnourished if they consume too many calories (overnutrition). [Source: Progress for Children - A Report Card on Nutrition, UNICEF, 2006]

Note: In the background paper, we defined malnutrition to only include "undernutrition". However, "overnutrition" should also be included in your definition of malnutrition. Since there are obviously clear differences between these two terms, it is important that you are clear on what kind of "malnutrition" you are speaking of.

Child pornography: Any means of depicting or promoting sexual abuse of a child, including print and/or audio, centered on sex acts or the genital organs of children. (This is the same definition as in the background paper)

Here are some documents that may be useful in your research:

Progress for Children: Achieving the MDGs with Equity

Progress for Children: A Report Card on Maternal Mortality

Progress for Children: A Report Card on Child Protection

The Progress for Children reports are excellent research opportunities for these two topics. We encourage you to read other reports that we did not link you to here, as well as past editions for the reports.

Happy holidays! We look forward to seeing you all in less than 2 months!!

Merry Christmas from Dictators Everywhere!

Hello Security Council delegates:

Hope you find this while you're warm and cozy this Holiday season to remind you of your duties.

First, some articles to check out.

The Silk Road Studies Program published an excellent article for a demonstration of how political pressures can affect the responses to cross-border terrorism. Though dated, it is an excellent example.

Their sister institute the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute also produces a lot of good material on regional issues in this tinderbox area that is rife with cross-border terrorism issues. Including one discussing methods for counter-insurgency operations in Russia's Chechnya and Dagestan regions. To add to Russia's troubles that we can examine, another excellent instance of political play with suspected acts of terrorism recently occured in Georgia, with Georgian police arresting several suspects who in addition to plotting terrorist attacks are also under suspicion of acting with Russian sanction.

Second, because I don't want to do too much work for all of you, I am going to give some hints as to major axis in cross-border terrorism.

First, the entire Middle East, and deep into South-East Asia forms a very long chain of various cross-border terror groups. This is added to by tributaries from the Caucasus region and Central Asia.

The number of terrorist groups that operate across borders in this area is too numerous to list here. Some high profile groups and regions you should be aware of:

• The PKK - A Kurdish nationalist organisation operating out of Northern Iraq, launching attacks into Turkey, Iran, and Syria in a bid to establish a Kurdistani homeland.
• Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shia militias in Iraq - An understanding of the Shia-Sunni split and the geography of these ethnicities will help you understand the Middle East much better. Power players in the Middle East often support terrorist groups to meet their ends.
• Balochistani Militias - Balochistan also suffers from nationalist uprisings, spreading into Iran and Pakistan. The Pakistaki effects can be found at the Pakistan Conflict Monitor's Balochistan chain.
• Pakistan's NWFP - A massive melting pot of insurgency, this is a key area of importance due to its effects on India, Afghanistan, and in Pakistan as well. It's serious business.
• Maoist insurgencies in India, Nepal, and Burma - Thought Communism was dead? Not in the remote jungles of north-eastern India, Nepal, and western Burma.

Another major axis exists as a result of narco-terrorism activities in South America affecting Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, Mexico, and much of Central America.

• FARC is the primary terrorist group to be aware of here.

Another major axis would likely exist in the Horn of Africa, but this is closer to a full blown revolution than an insurgency or latent terrorism. The scale is much bigger, but can face similar issues of pegging in radical factions in nations with porous borders, weak militaries, and a general lack of law and order.

• Al-Shabab is a primary group to be aware of here.

Third, some homework. The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS IS GEOGRAPHY! These three regions are going to be key to your discussions. Learn a little bit about their geography, ethnography, and vital economic resources. The CIA World Factbook is a great place to start.

Finally, some fun reading to better inform you about terrorism in general. This excellent article from STRATFOR might help you understand the way counter-terrorism works, and the way terrorism works, by examining holes in the planning stages of a terrorist attack.

Cheers,

Robert

Dias

Why read the book when you can watch the movie?

Reading can be tedious and boring (unless of course you're reading Harry Potter), this is why I have for you today some moving, talking, pictures which will tell you everything you could have spent hours reading :) you may thank me as you deem fit (snacks during the conference will be appreciated ;) )

Afghan's opium war, the other war

Fighting Against Narcotics in Iran

Violence and Drug Trafficking in Mexico

"Lets all work together... or not..."

Hello SC people.

Sorry for the delay in the blog. I know you were all anxiously awaiting the next SC post... right? Don't answer that.

If the title wasn't any indication to the topic of this post, here is some clarification. Terrorism is highly complex (as you will see with later blog posts). One question that comes to mind is whether or not this complexity necessitates multilateral action. Generally speaking, the UN calls for multilateral action to resolve global issues. It makes sense. Global issues [such as cross-border terrorism :-O] affect many countries so it is usually commonplace to hear suggestions for multilateral (or in some cases bilateral) action. STOP!

Multilateral: agreed upon or participated in by three or more parties, especially the governments of different countries (Oxford dictionary)
Bilateral: involving two parties (Oxford dictionary)
Unilateral: (of an action or decision) performed by or affecting only one person, group, or country involved in a situation, without the agreement of another or the others (Oxford dictionary)

Multilateral agreements are more common among nations who are more influenced by the liberal theory in international politics. Collective security and collective action in adressing issues are stressed. The United Nations is founded on liberal IR theory and thus we can see many instances of multilateral arangements. Past multilateral action on terrorism has been taken. You will see one such example in the background papers (WHICH YOU MUST READ OR ELSE DARKNESS WILL FALL UPON MANKIND!!!). The UN Office on Drugs and Crime (or UNODC) has an entire section dedicated to combating terrorism which calls for multilateral action and cooperation.

Not all UN members share this liberal ideology. There are many who are influenced by realist theory (aka the Dark Side) where states act provided it is in their self-interest. These nations generally favour unilateral action as they are free too pursue the course of action that they deem is in their national self-interest. The question is, in which camp does your country fall? Give into your inner nerd and research for clarification.

As always, if you have any specific questions relating to the SC or to HSMUN, feel free to contact us or the HSMUN executive. We may be several strange, old, scary people, but we are nice at heart and here to make this experience as awesome as possible. Next week: WHO KNOWS! Will we return to our discussions on terrorism? Will we discuss more issues surrounding the topic? Will we take a whole new direction? Stay tuned to the blog to find out more!

"Everybody’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s a really easy way: stop participating in it."
-Noam Chomsky

Greetings ECOFIN Delegates!

Christmas is almost upon us and you guessed right, that means more HSMUN research (disclaimer: please don't ACTUALLY spend your Christmas break doing research). Just another quick heads up on the sustainable technological development topic.

You've all doubtless heard of the array of energy resources out there. Although this is not the only subtopic you must focus on as ECOFIN delegates, it is certainly one of the most important. Energy resources can be of 3 types - non-renewable, renewable, and perpetual. Non-renewables are the ones we all know and love - oil, natural gas, coal. These resources are dirty in the sense that they release significant carbon and other emissions into the atmosphere when they are burned. They are also limited in supply and will eventually be exhausted. Sustainable technological development focusses on moving from rough non-renewable technologies to cleaner non-renewables to renewables to perpetuals.

Renewable resources are resources that are not limited in supply, as they replenish on a visible timescale. The problem with these resources is that humans can have a significant impact; overuse or degradation of these resources comes with the cost of potentially permanent and severe environmental damage. For example, biomass (burning wood and other vegetation) and water are renewable resources. When these resources are used responsibly, such as planting a tree for every tree harvested, or using water without running rivers dry - they have much less negative environmental impacts than non-renewables (yes, carbon dioxide is still released into the atmosphere when you burn trees, but ideally if you plant one tree for every tree you harvest, the impact is cancelled out). Misusing these resources, such as severe deforestation, can have significant impacts such as desertification, loss of wildlife, changes in weather and water patterns, etc.

The best resources out there are perpetuals. These, like wind, tidal energy, and sunlight, are potentially infinite and cannot be directly impacted by humans. As more efficient technologies develop to harvest these sources, it is more likely that these are the sources our world will depend on centuries, and possibly even decades from now. Making the switch, however, is difficult and costly in the short-term, and that is where your mission lies.

Cheers and Happy Holidays!

The Children Left Behind

UNICEF recently released a report called "The Children Left Behind". This is the latest report in the Innocenti Research Centre's Report Card series, exploring the depth of inequalities in child well-being in the world's richest countries. It is the first report to ever compare the gap between children at the bottom of their societies and the average child living a "normal' life.

You can read the report here.

The Legal Committee Reports!

Delegates!


You may be wondering just what is going on in the halls of the United Nations these days. If you aren’t, you should be. Luckily for you, your EXTREME ACTION NEWS TEAM is always eager to update you on the relevant (and often not-so-relevant) goings-on at the UN and around the world!

As I reviewed the most recent happenings of the UN, wondering, “Gee, what would the delegates really like to hear about?”, one headline caught my eye. It caught my eye because a) It involved a report of the Sixth Committee (the ÜBER-EXCITING LEGAL COMMITTEE- why do all the best committees die in HSMUN?), and b) it just might relate to one of the topics being debated at HSMUN this year. So, here’s a quick look at some of what’s being talked about at the UN right now:

First, quickly peruse this resolution (you can just start at page 3 and skim until page 6):

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N10/547/97/PDF/N1054797.pdf?OpenElement

Now, let me summarize what this resolution is all about (and I may or may not quote from UN news releases). Like all resolutions, it seems, it starts with a bajillion clauses in the preamble, basically all just saying:

• Terrorism is bad. (As your SC dais has already mentioned, the real question is not what terrorism is, or if it is based. The question is what to do about it.)

• Terrorism is really bad.

• We’ve said it once, and we’ll say it again: BOO TERRORISM!

• States must work together to combat terrorism.

That last point is what’s really the basis for the ‘meat’ of this resolution, if we can ever say that a UN resolution has meat to it. If there is anything to be done about the many heinous manifestations of terrorism, it will be done only if there is cooperation in the international community. What needs to be done? Well, points that are particularly relevant to the SC topic of debate this year include:

• International, regional and subregional organizations, and Nation States, need to implement the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, and be party to relevant treaties and protocols combating terrorism.

• States must intensify, where appropriate, the exchange of information on facts related to terrorism in order to avoid the dissemination of inaccurate or unverified information.

• All are called upon to cooperate with and support other States in prosecuting perpetrators of terrorist acts, and are urged to cooperate with the Secretary-General, intergovernmental organizations and one another to ensure that technical and other expert advice be provided to those States requiring and requesting assistance to accomplish the above.

So there it is: the General Assembly’s (or, at least, Legal Committee’s) disposition when it comes to terrorism, and, especially, when it comes to terrorism that crosses borders. Now your work begins: how does your country (yes, this involved foreign policy research) relate to these calls from the GA? What might be sacrificed by cooperating so closely with other governments? What stands to be gained? What can your country feasibly accomplish in the fight against terrorism? What do you lack yet?

So, to work! Research! Write! Have fun! (or we’ll send you back to where you were- unemployed, in Greenland.)

Hey UNICEFers...

Remember how a couple of days ago I told you about the beautiful website that is Twitter?

Guess what just showed up on my homepage!

Two beautiful articles on www.unicef.org, that's what!

Two case studies regarding our malnutrition topic for you to mull over on this chilly December evening: Myanmar and Haiti.

Remember, you can search for stories on the UNICEF website by country. That may be useful when researching your country's policies on the two topics for this year's committee.

Just to start you off ...

So, first off I guess the UNODC website will probably be pretty useful in educating you on some of the major issues concerning our topics (these issues will definitely come up in debate, so it's a good idea to keep yourselves informed and updated - we've got some interesting topics so it shouldn't be too boring!)

One of the current events concerning our topic is definitely going to be the US war on drugs (primarily in South/Latin America). Here are some website links and videos showing some different viewpoints:

Drug War Clock - an interesting website that shows updating statistics

War on Drugs - because we all love wikipedia (just make sure not to cite it anywhere!)

RT video - yeah ... I know haha, but it's an interesting video I swear!!

hope this motivates your research, there'll be more coming each week :)

Cancun Talks Getting Underway

Hi delegates! Hopefully the fact that we are getting closer to the holidays is making up for the busy time of year.

So there has been a new news release by scientists during this initial week of the Cancun talks. Apparantly this year has been the warmest ever recorded worldwide. It will be interesting to see how this factors in to the arguements both for and against emission reductions in the near future. Do you think that this will put a damper on the arguments of any nations still against adopting policies for emission reductions?

As for the Cancun talks themselves, there has been looming expectations of its relative unimportance on the current radars of world governments, especially after the size and media coverage of the previous convention in Copenhagen. This time around, there will be next to no major heads of state representing their countries, and the results of the conference are expected to be lackluster at best, which is especially disconcerting considering the meagre outcomes of the much more prominant Copenhagen session. Moreover, as always the debate over the extent to which developing nations should be forced to regulate emissions is predicted to be a large point of contestion, as such nations argue that it is only fair that they be able to develop the same way that modern industrialized nations have already done in the past. This also raises the question of how developing countries can best try to reach their targets for emission reductions. Would it be more effective for industrialized countries to participate in technology transfer to enable cleaner-developing countries, or is their money and time better spent reducing emissions in the domestic markets of deceloped countries?

Social media can help you research!

*This post may be useful to not only to UNICEF delegates, but delegates from other HSMUN committees as well.

Is anyone on Twitter?

It's a great way to quickly find out what's going on in the world.

Today, @SpeakerPelosi linked me to this article informing me that the House of Representatives in the USA passed a child nutrition bill to promote better eating habits by giving the federal government more authority to decide what is sold at schools across the United States.

For more information on the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, here are two articles which provide a little more information on this new bill.

First article, second article.

Here are some other tweets I have found useful in the past few weeks and a brief description of what each is about...

@UNICEF - "Founded in 1946, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) is the driving force that helps build a world where the rights of every child are realized."

@UN - "Official twitter account of United Nations. Get the latest information on the UN."

@Refugees - "The official account of UNHCR. Follow us as we provide vital aid and protection to the forcibly displaced around the world."

@cnnbrk - "CNN.com is among the world's leaders in online news and information delivery."

@ONECampaign - "ONE is a grassroots campaign of 2 million people committed to the fight against extreme poverty and preventable diseases."

@savethechildren - "Save the Children is the leading independent organization creating lasting change for children in need in the United States and around the world."

@hrw - "Human Rights Watch’s goal is to provide the most timely information about human rights crises and developments in some 90 countries around the world."

That's right! Twitter isn't just for following your favorite celebrities and pro athletes. It can be a quick way to jump start your research for HSMUN 2011!

Does Security =/= Sovereignty?

Good day prospective SC delegates.


Each week, our blog will be alternating between terrorism and contentious issues relating to the topic. As we've mentioned, we'd prefer it if we didn't spend half of the time debating "what is terrorism". The blog will cover all of those juicy details.

This week, we deal with one of the more contentious issues surrounding cross-border terrorism: sovereignty!!!

The problem with cross-border terrorism is that it crosses borders, thus involving multiple nations. A country may want to pursue terrorists hiding in other countries but they cannot do this if the host country does not approve. The pursuit of cross-border terrorists can harm innocent people in a region not involved in the conflict and strain relations between states. Take the case of Pakistan, a country used by the Taliban as a base for attacks. US attacks on the Pakistani side of the border have caused a great deal of damage and many have been hurt.

I can easily think of a few nations who would support the reduction of state sovereignty in order to pursue terrorist groups. I can just as easily think of a few who vehemently oppose infringement on state sovereignty. Your task: find out whether or not your country places a higher priority on sovereignty or on the pursuit of terrorists. In committee, you'll have to try and strike a balance between respect for sovereignty and the resolution of the issue.

The idea of sovereignty ties in strongly with another contentious issue, unilateral vs multilateral action. TO be discussed at a later date.

Next week: find out more spectacular specifics on what constitutes terrorism

"Terrorism has become the systematic weapon of a war that knows no borders or seldom has a face."
-Jacques Chirac, speech, Sep. 24, 1986